OC Immigration Attorney

The Department of Homeland Security is reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records.

According to Richard Rocha, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman, the review is part of the agency’s broader, nationwide strategy to prioritize the deportations of illegal immigrants who pose a threat to national security and public safety. Rocha declined to provide further details.

Critics assailed the plan as another sign that the Obama administration is trying to create a kind of backdoor “amnesty” program. An immigration attorney who was briefed on the effort by Homeland Security’s deputy chief counsel in Houston, said DHS confirmed that it’s reviewing cases nationwide, though not yet to the pace of the local office. However, they are following general guidelines that allow for the dismissal of cases for defendants who have been in the country for two or more years and have no felony convictions. In some instances, defendants can have one misdemeanor conviction, but it cannot involve a DWI, family violence or sexual crime.

Opponents of illegal immigration were critical of the dismissals. However, immigrants who have had their cases terminated are frequently left in limbo, and are not granted any form of legal status. These illegal immigrants still have no work permits and Social Security Numbers. ICE is not going to proceed with their removal from the United States. However, they are still here illegally.

In a June 30 memo, ICE Assistant Secretary John Morton outlined the agency’s priorities, saying it had the capacity to remove about 400,000 illegal immigrants annually. The memo outlines priorities for the detention and removal system, putting criminals and threats to national security at the top of the list. Recently, ICE officials provided a copy of a new policy memo from Morton dated Aug. 20 that instructs government attorneys to review the court cases of people with pending applications to adjust status based on their relation to a U.S. citizen. Morton estimates in the memo that the effort could affect up to 17,000 cases.

The Justice Department has decided to file suit against Arizona on the grounds that the state’s new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives.

The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of “preemption,” which is based on the Constitution’s supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.

A federal lawsuit will dramatically escalate the legal and political battle over the Arizona law, which gives police the power to question anyone if they have a “reasonable suspicion” that the person is an illegal immigrant. The measure has drawn words of condemnation from President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and opposition from civil rights groups. It also has prompted at least five other lawsuits. Arizona officials have urged the Obama administration not to sue.

The preemption doctrine has been established in Supreme Court decisions, and some legal experts have said such a federal argument likely would persuade a judge to declare the law unconstitutional.

But lawyers who helped draft the Arizona legislation have expressed doubt that a preemption argument would prevail. The law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in April, is scheduled to take effect on July 29, 2010.

An indictment unsealed in Philadelphia charged five brothers with extortion and conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) for their alleged involvement in a human trafficking operation.

Four of the Botsvynyuk brothers were arrested and are charged with conspiring to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity by operating a human trafficking organization that smuggled young Ukrainian migrants into the United States and forced them to work for the brothers with little or no pay.

Rather than bringing the workers to the United States legally, the indictment alleges that the Botsvynyuk organization obtained tourist visas to Mexico and had operatives who coached the workers on how to enter the United States illegally. While some of the workers successfully entered the country, others were taken into custody by U.S. immigration officials and remained in detention for almost two months. Once the victims were released, with immigration documents and notices to appear for immigration hearings, the Botsvynyuk organization transported them to Philadelphia either by bus or by plane. The brothers then confiscated the immigration documents and summonses from the workers and put them to work at night cleaning large chain stores.

Throughout their employment with the brothers, the workers lived with up to five people in one room, slept on dirty mattresses on the floor, and were rarely, if ever, paid. None of the victims were paid what was promised and they were told that they had to continue working until their debts, ranging from $10,000 to $50,000, were paid. Workers were allegedly struck and beaten, sometimes in the presence of others, if they attempted to quit or leave the employ of the Botsvynyuk brothers. According to the indictment, one female worker was brutally raped on several occasions. After some workers escaped, Omelyan Botsvynyuk resorted to extorting the workers’ families in Ukraine, threatening them with harm if the workers did not return to work or pay their debts.

Omelyan Botsvynyuk, 51, was arrested in Germany; Stepan Botsvynyuk, 35, was arrested in Philadelphia; Mykhaylo and Yaroslav Botsvynyuk, 41, were arrested in Canada. Dmytro Botsvynyuk remains in Ukraine, a country that has not entered into an extradition treaty with the United States. The defendants in Canada and Germany were arrested pursuant to Interpol arrest warrants and are in the process of being extradited to the United States to face the charges.

If convicted of all charges, the defendants face from 20 years to life in prison and a fine from $250,000 to $750,00.

The case was investigated by the Joint FBI Organized Crime/ICE Human Trafficking Alien Smuggling Task Force. Assistance was provided by Pennsylvania State Police, the Philadelphia Police Department, the Department of Labor and Racketeering – Office of Inspector General, Toronto Police Department, German National Police, Berlin State Police, Ukraine Security Service, US National Central Bureau, the Department of Justice Office of International Affairs, and INTERPOL. It is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel A. Velez, and Trial Attorney Eric Gibson of the Civil Rights Division.

If you have been the victim of illegal smuggling, contact The Nunez Firm. We might be able to help you obtain a T visa as the victim of human trafficking.

Leaders of the immigration reform movement, who so far have insisted on pushing for an omnibus package of bills, should heed the young people in their ranks calling for a stand-alone effort to pass the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors legislation, or the DREAM Act.

The bill would give undocumented young people the opportunity to earn conditional permanent residency , which can lead to legal permanent residency and then citizenship,  if: they graduate from U.S. high schools; have been in the country continuously at least five years before the legislation’s enactment; and meet certain post-secondary educational or military service requirements. This is the only aspect of immigration reform — other than those related to enforcement — with any steam behind it.

Until now, reform advocates have been reluctant to separate the DREAM Act from the broader immigration reform package, for fear they were removing the most politically palatable piece. But that may be a miscalculation. Most of those who would be affected by the legislation were brought to the United States by their parents. Such is the case of Eric Balderas, the 19-year-old Harvard University student whose status became the subject of national attention when federal authorities learned he is undocumented. Balderas was brought to the country at age 4 and grew up thinking he was a U.S. citizen. Not until his mother refused to let him get a driver’s license did he learn the truth. Still, he became valedictorian at his Texas high school and is now studying molecular and cellular biology. His deportation has been indefinitely deferred.

Opponents of the DREAM Act say the parents of such students are to blame. However the fact remains that the children did not trap themselves. And permitting them to go to college is a smart investment, since students like Balderas will become successful professionals and gainfully employed taxpayers. Sacrificing the future of talented students does not serve the greater good; it is time to pass the DREAM Act.

When President Obama announced last month that he would ask Congress for $500 million and deploy the National Guard to strengthen security on the border with Mexico, several advocacy groups in the region that had campaigned for a different approach were forced to confront a disappointing reality: Washington still wasn’t listening to them.

So, members of groups from Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California were among the roughly 45 delegates who came together in San Diego. At the top of the agenda was how to counter Obama’s message that further security measures are needed. The delegates acknowledged that their goal, comprehensive immigration reform, is unlikely to be taken up by Congress this year.

According to Louie Gilot of the Border Network for Human Rights based in El Paso, we were promised change by the administration, however we’re not only getting the same enforcement-only policy, we’re getting even more of it.

Homeland Security Department officials disputed that, citing a speech by Secretary Janet Napolitano this week in which she argued that the administration has backed calls for comprehensive immigration reform and has adopted a “smarter” approach than its predecessor.

The border groups had hoped to convince administration officials that, with arrests of illegal immigrants on the border at the lowest levels since the early 1970s, the current enforcement strategy is working. They noted that the number of border agents has already risen from about 11,000 in 2004 to 20,000 today.

According to Andrea Guerrero, policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego, some of the advocates had been meeting over the past year and a half with Customs and Border Protection officials to encourage more humane policies, including cell phone towers to help border crossers who find themselves endangered in the desert. The groups had also encouraged a better relationship between the agency and local communities.

The groups pledged to combine their efforts. According to Fernando Garcia, director of the Border Network for Human Rights, enforcement is needed and they recognize that. But it has to be infused with our American values, such as accountability, fiscal responsibility, respect to human rights and community security.

Noel Gutierrez, 33, suspected of robbing at least eight people in El Monte and Rosemead while posing as an immigration agent was behind bars Sunday according to authorities.  He was initially booked on suspicion of robbery and kidnapping. More charges, including impersonating an immigration federal officer, are likely to be added later.

Gutierrez allegedly robbed six people in El Monte and two in Rosemead while wearing a United States Immigration baseball cap and vest.

The first incident occurred at Rosemead Park, where the suspect allegedly approached a man and claimed to be an immigration agent. The suspect was described wearing identification for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the federal agency that was replaced in 2003 by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Gutierrez then headed to the Valley Mall in El Monte, in the 10800 block of Valley Boulevard, where he used a similar ruse to rob at least six victims.

Gutierrez is suspected of telling people at the mall he was an immigration agent as he searched their wallets and purses and helped himself to cash and valuables.

One of the alleged victims in one of the El Monte incidents was located only after she called her cell phone, which was in police custody, in an attempt to locate it, according to the police. She had not reported the crime to police because she was worried she would be deported.

The police also explained to her that she was the victim of a crime and the police were not concerned with her immigration status.

Another man apparently had his wallet stolen by the suspect at the mall.

Police continue seeking other possible victims.

Authorities said they believe Gutierrez returned to Rosemead late Saturday afternoon to continue his alleged robbery spree where he contacted a woman at her home and demanded to see her immigration papers. Then he followed her into her home and began searching as if he was a police officer. Only after the suspect left, the woman noticed items missing from her home.

Arizona lawmakers should pay attention to stories like these. The new anti-immigrant law in Arizona will likely result in many more instances like this.

If you have been the victim of a crime, contact The Nunez Firm regarding a U visa, which will allow you to stay in the United States and possibly obtain lawful permanent residence. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will discuss your case with you during a free and confidential consultation.

In late 2008, the newest version of the U.S. naturalization test was introduced. Could you pass it? The questions are usually selected from a list of 100 samples that prospective citizens can look at ahead of the interview. Some are easy, some are not. We have picked some of the more difficult ones. Naturalization applicants must answer six of the ten questions correctly in order to pass the test.

NOTES: Candidates are not given multiple choices during the naturalization test. The following questions have been adapted from the immigration service’s sample questions.

If you are considering naturalization, contact The Nunez Firm to schedule a free consultation. Managing attorney Jay Nunez will discuss your case with you and help you better understand the process.

A coalition of groups that want to limit immigration, legal and illegal, has an ad claiming that illegal immigrants steal jobs from Americans. That’s a popular talking point among the build-the-fence, seal-the border types, but it’s just not so.

The truth is that immigrants don’t take American jobs, according to most economists and others who have studied the issue.

Policy analyst at the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, Madeleine Sumption, claims that Immigrant workers create almost as many jobs as they occupy. Additionally Sumption added that Immigrant workers often create the jobs they work in and they also buy things making the economy bigger.

As she and a co-author wrote in a report last year for a group created by the British government:

Somerville and Sumption: The impact of Immigration on a nation’s economy remains small, for several reasons. Immigrants are not competitive in many types of jobs, and hence are not direct substitutes for natives. Local employers increase demand for low-skilled labor in areas that receive low-skilled immigrant inflows. Immigrants contribute to demand for goods and services that they consume, in turn increasing the demand for labor. And immigrants contribute to labor market efficiency and long-term economic growth.

Of course, none of that matters to the folks who don’t live in the reality-based universe.

During the Cinco de Mayo celebration at the White House, President Obama again slammed the new Arizona law targeting illegal immigrants. Obama said the new Arizona law requiring police to demand identification from those they suspect are undocumented immigrants undermines American principles and will be closely monitored by the federal government.

Additionally, President Obama promised a push for immigration reform law on Capitol Hill stating that the way to fix the broken immigration system is by common sense and comprehensive reform. He also spelled out elements he wants in the legislation: continued emphasis on securing U.S. borders; going after businesses that knowingly hire undocumented immigrant workers; and requirements that people who enter the US illegally admit they broke the law, pay a fine and taxes, and learn English before applying for American citizenship.

After praising a Democrat-sponsored bill unveiled in the Senate last week, Obama added a nuance suggesting he still thinks winning final passage in 2010 for immigration reform will be difficult.  However, Obama questioned whether Congress had the political will to get the job finished this year, claiming he wants to solve the immigration issue in 2010 with Democrats and Republicans.

Despite the fact that we are a nation of immigrants, immigration continues to be one of America’s most contentious topics. The new law in Arizona, where police are now ordered to arrest illegal immigrants, has set off a bitter debate across the United States. However, as in the past, much of the debate is founded on mythology. Here are 5 myths that have clouded the immigration debate taken from the Washington Post:

1.    Immigrants take jobs from American workers.

Although immigrants account for 12.5% of the U.S. population, they make up about 15% of the workforce. The reason they are overrepresented largely among workers, is because the rest of our population is aging. Additionally, low U.S. fertility rates and the upcoming retirement of the baby boomers; mean that immigration is likely to be the only source of growth in the workforce in the decades ahead. As record numbers of retirees begin drawing Social Security checks, younger immigrant workers will be paying taxes, somewhat easing the financial pressures on the system.

Moreover, immigrants tend to be concentrated in high- and low-skilled occupations that complement — rather than compete with — jobs held by native workers. And the foreign-born workers who fill lower-paying jobs are typically first-hired/first-fired employees, allowing employers to expand and contract their workforces rapidly. As a result, immigrants experience higher employment than natives during booms — but they suffer higher job losses during downturns, including the current one.

Immigration also stimulates growth by creating new consumers, entrepreneurs and investors. As a result of this growth, economists estimate that wages for the vast majority of American workers are slightly higher than they would be without immigration. U.S. workers without a high school degree experience wage declines as a result of competition from immigrants, but these losses are modest, at just over 1%. Economists also estimate that for each job an immigrant fills, an additional job is created.

2.     Immigration is at an all-time high, and most new immigrants came illegally.

Today, about two-thirds of immigrants are here legally, either as naturalized citizens or as lawful permanent residents, more commonly known as green card holders. And of the approximately 10.8 million immigrants who are in the country illegally, about 40% arrived legally but overstayed their visas.

Mexicans are also the largest group of lawful immigrants. As for the flow of illegal immigrants, apprehensions along the U.S.-Mexico border have declined by more than 50% over the past four years, while increases in the size of the illegal population, which had been growing by about 500,000 a year for more than a decade, have stopped. This decline is largely due to the recession, but stepped-up border enforcement is playing a part.

3.        Today’s immigrants are not integrating into American life like past waves did.

Today, as before, immigrant integration takes a generation or two. Learning English is one key driver of this process; the education and upward mobility of immigrants’ children is the other. On the first count, today’s immigrants consistently seek English instruction in such large numbers that adult-education programs cannot meet the demand, especially in places such as California. On the second count, the No Child Left Behind Act has played a critical role in helping educate immigrant children because it holds schools newly accountable for teaching them English.

However, the unauthorized status of millions of foreign-born immigrants can slow integration in crucial ways. For example, illegal immigrants are ineligible for in-state tuition at most public colleges and universities, putting higher education effectively out of their reach. And laws prohibiting unauthorized immigrants from getting driver’s licenses or various professional credentials can leave them stuck in jobs with a high density of other immigrants and unable to advance.

4.    Cracking down on illegal border crossings will make us safer.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, we have dramatically strengthened our borders through the use of biometrics at ports of entry, secure cargo-shipment systems, intelligence gathering, integrated databases and increased international cooperation. The Border Patrol has nearly doubled in size in the past five years, to more than 20,000 agents. The Department of Homeland Security says it is on schedule to meet congressional mandates for southwestern border enforcement, including fence-building. And cooperation with the Mexican government has improved significantly.

5.       Immigration reform cannot happen in an election year.

All the significant immigration bills enacted in recent decades were passed in election years, often at the last minute and after fractious debates.

This list dates back to the Refugee Act of 1980, which established our system for humanitarian protection and refugee and asylum admissions. Next came the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which made it illegal to hire unauthorized immigrants and provided amnesty for 2.7 million illegal immigrants. The Immigration Act of 1990 increased the number of visas allotted to highly skilled workers. And the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act charged immigration agencies with implementing significant new law enforcement mandates.

Ruling out immigration reform, whether because Congress has other priorities or because it’s an election year, would be a mistake. The outline for immigration legislation that Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and his Democratic colleagues unveiled last week, together with the uproar over the Arizona law, may help convince lawmakers that there’s no time like the present.

If you support comprehensive immigration reform, contact your congressperson and make your voice heard. Click here to find out which member of the House of Representatives serves you.